Mission convergence, is a unique initiative by the
government to bring about qualitative improvement in the lives of the urban
poor. Rashmi Singh talks about the convergence model applied to bring
various beneficiary and welfare oriented entitlement schemes to the urban
community at the district level and to help them find their identity.
Rashmi Singh is heading a unique initiative of Delhi
Government namely the Mission Convergence-a programme for social justice and
empowerment. A 1989 batch UTCS officer, she has been instrumental in several
policy level changes for social development in Delhi. Her Public Private
Community Partnership modules for social development have been hailed as
replicable models of inclusive governance and adopted by the centre &
several state governments.
- She has won several awards including the Stree Shakti Devi Ahilya Bai
Holkar Award 2009 by the President of India on International Women’s Day,
2010 this year for her unique contribution to the field of gender
empowerment, the Women of Excellence Award by FICCI in 2009, Commonwealth
Association Silver Award in 2006.
This interview is part of a special series of
interviews “Behind the City Lights’ brought to you as a collaborative
initiative of OneWorld South Asia (OWSA) and Urban
Health Resource Centre (UHRC) .The
special series is aimed to enhance focus from different quarters on the
subject of equitable health provision in cities in the international year of
‘Urban Health’
OneWorld South Asia: What are the reasons that results
in large proportion of urban poor- finding it difficult to access
services?
Rashmi Singh: Large numbers of urban poor are the
migratory population who come in search of better life and job to cities.
First of all, finding their feet in a big metro like Delhi becomes very
difficult, as they have to struggle with the basics and are sometimes not able
to meet two square meals in a day.
They are mostly engaged in the unorganised sector and live in slums or in
the resettlement colonies. The crucial aspect missing is the social bonding
and the absence of a governance structure, unlike in rural areas. Whether
strong or weak, the presence of local governance structures, local panchayats
help the rural communities raise their issues, and community channels through
which they feel counted.
In the urban system people do not have a voice mechanism and they become
invisible. There is the whole question of identity and being rooted to the
community to which they belong. When the first step is itself weak, the
question of being able to navigate into the second step, into governance
structure becomes difficult.
The urban poor also face the problem of proving their identity that becomes
one of the major bottlenecks in accessing services. Getting their ration
cards, election and other identity proof means producing many more documents
which is like a vicious cycle. So while they may exist physically their
problem to the accesses is compounded by facts each of them related to the
other. They are fighting a battle to count. The absence of traditional
institution mechanisms, community channels also makes the process more
cumbersome and difficult for the urban poor to access benefits.
OWSA: We understand that Mission Convergence is
surveying the poor habitation of the Delhi Urban Poor. Please throw some light
on this and give an estimate of the vulnerable population in Delhi?
Rashmi Singh: Under Mission Convergence for the first time
in Delhi we did the exercise of the identification of the vulnerable
population. So far the system in the capital was not based on the
identification of the counting at the household levels, based on survey
methodology. The BPL list which one would find existing in many states has
been based on some survey, in Delhi it was not. Those who wish to apply; fill
up a form and given income certificate, they would be considered whether
entitled to a BPL ration or not.
So the food and civil supplies department has largely been the custodian of
data meant for poor and also for many of the other departments, and so if they
have to ride on the scheme meant for BPL they would have to ask the civil
supplies department. But here again there was no identification done in a
proactive manner.
While conducting the exercise of identifying the urban population we found
that many deserving people who should have been classified as BPL were
actually left out of the system and ironically were drawing the ration which
was meant for above poverty line, whereas many drawing ration under below
poverty line were actually ones who should not have qualified. So we decided
to go to the field and cover the areas of geographic vulnerability. And it was
not difficult to do that because we mapped off the areas looking at all our
slums and Jhuggi Jhopri clusters, FG and H category of clusters, and found 90%
of the urban poor reside in these areas.
We conducted the survey in two phases and covered 9 lakh household and then
5 lakh more households-in total 60 lakh people. In the first two phase of
survey of the 9 lakh we saw around 5 lakh were in social and occupational
vulnerability. Later when we did this estimation five lakhs were in the broad
category of vulnerability and there were around two and half lakh households
which were classified as most vulnerable equated with the Antyodaya. One lakh
homeless people are still in the process of being surveyed, after which we
will be able to clearly come up with a figure.
OWSA: What value do civil society organizations add to
the government initiatives by providing social benefits to the vulnerable
sections?
Rashmi Singh: The government has its strengths and
limitations. It can provide regulatory mechanisms, funding support, resource
support, linkages, technical support, over site mechanism. The civil society
organisations, on the other hand have a lot of strength in terms of bringing
to the government certain areas of flexibility and outreach in terms of
community participation, engagement, and mobilisation.
When it comes to actual mobilisation of the community and reaching out to
those who are most vulnerable, going door-to-door, bringing people into the
folds, spreading information and awareness, doing counseling, and doing a need
assessment, we found that engagement of civil society organisations has been
far more beneficial than a normal governmental channel. Also these civil
organisations have managed to reach out to such areas which were not covered
in government system.
The solution couldn’t be that we add more staff and more departments and
have more offices; rather we decided to adopt the public-private partnership
model which was cost effective also. There was the flexibility that we provide
them funds, and they could rent out spaces, going into the interiors right in
the midst of the community. On the other hand if we would have had to do it
alone like for capital assets, buildings, creating structures, and hiring
people, then it would have taken five years. So the flexibility in the
operation and cost effectiveness was what made us engage the NGOs and other
community organisations.
So we see the civil society engagement very important in Mission
Convergence as it is been all about GON, NGO and community and private sector
partnership. This is a unique model in which there has been the spirit of
partnership between all the sectors. So it brought out lot of innovative
elements, strength of each of these partners into the programme which has
added to the strength of the programme as a whole.
OWSA: We are aware that Mission Convergence has
proactively set District Resource Centers in all nine districts (Samajik
Suvidha Sangam Kendras) of Delhi. Please tell us what progress has been
made and the challenges faced during implementation?
Rashmi: There are these district resource centers at
district levels and these are housed in the office of the Deputy Commissioner.
The Deputy Commissioners were earlier doing revenue related work and
regulatory work. But with Mission Convergence the government has given them a
developmental approach, where they would also be looking at the social
developmental needs of a community living in the particular district. These
district resource centers were actually provided to be run by district nodal
NGOs.
The Nodal NGOs were not only housed in the office of the Deputy
Commissioners but they also became a kind of regular partners in this exercise
which meant that in every district they had to call and organise a collective
forum of the various departments involved which were basically looking at any
welfare schemes.
This means involvement and coordination of departments like social welfare,
health, education and women and child, labour and urban development, and food
and supplies. All these departments were sitting together in the district
convergence forum meeting which is organised every month. This is a break from
the usual. Earlier people at district level were not talking to each other;
every department was doing its own thing. Bringing the entire department
together became a very powerful tool for us where the problem was raised
department wise, and the NGOs, the resource center became a coordinating
body.
The resource center became a body where the information of the district
regarding the vulnerable people is housed and then they do the district level
planning as to what programmes can be targeted and to look at the eligibility
of the family to the specific programme looking at the vulnerability and
matching it with the different programmes. It has become a very important
institutional mechanism to actually reach out and give a response which is
need based.
In terms of challenges, since it has been a major departure from
departmentalised functioning that we have been used to, the transition has not
been easy and there has been a lot of resistance, there has been the huge
problem of changing the mindset of stakeholders. Also people look at their own
small little role, but not at the broader vision, of what we are trying to do
as a family. It has been a huge challenge, rather then scheme wise how to make
all the departments look at it like a family. The transition has been very
challenging.
There are three-four models that are being followed:
- One is the public-private partnership and community partnership
- Use of information-technology, to be able to provide better sense of
transparency and accountability into the system, to track the development,
the outcomes
- The integrated approach, the inter-sectoral which we call the
single-window, intervention which range across various
issues.
